Background The primary aim of this systematic review was to investigate the individual/combined effectiveness of nonpharmacological interventions in individuals with persistent acromioclavicular joint osteoarthritis. The secondary aims were to investigate the comparative effectiveness of nonpharmacological versus surgical interventions, and to identify the criteria used for defining failure of conservative interventions in individuals who require surgery for persistent acromioclavicular joint osteoarthritis. Method Major electronic databases were searched from inception until October 2018. Studies involving adults aged 16 years and older, diagnosed clinically and radiologically with isolated acromioclavicular joint osteoarthritis for at least three months or more were included. Studies must explicitly state the type and duration of conservative interventions. Methodological risk of bias was assessed using the Modified Downs and Black checklist. Results Ten surgical intervention studies were included for final synthesis. No studies investigated the effectiveness of nonpharmacological interventions or compared them with surgical interventions. Common nonpharmacological interventions trialed from the 10 included studies were activity modification (n = 8) and physiotherapy (n = 4). Four to six months was the most often reported timeframe defining failure of conservative management (range 3–12 months). Conclusions Currently, there is no evidence to guide clinicians about the individual or combined effectiveness of nonpharmacological interventions for individuals with persistent acromioclavicular joint osteoarthritis.

No abstract

Background Cervical spine mobilizations may differentially modulate both components of the stress response, consisting of the autonomic nervous system and hypothalamic pituitary adrenal-axis, depending on whether the target location is the upper or lower cervical spine. To date, no study has investigated this. Methods A randomized, crossover trial investigated the effects of upper versus lower cervical mobilization on both components of the stress response simultaneously. The primary outcome was salivary cortisol (sCOR) concentration. The secondary outcome was heart rate variability measured with a smartphone application. Twenty healthy males, aged 21–35, were included. Participants were randomly assigned to block-AB (upper then lower cervical mobilization, n = 10) or block-BA (lower than upper cervical mobilization, n = 10), separated by a one-week washout period. All interventions were performed in the same room (University clinic) under controlled conditions. Statistical analyses were performed with a Friedman’s Two-Way ANOVA and Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test. Results Within groups, sCOR concentration reduced thirty-minutes following lower cervical mobilization ( p = 0.049). Between groups, sCOR concentration was different at thirty-minutes following the intervention ( p = 0.018). Conclusion There was a statistically significant reduction in sCOR concentration following lower cervical spine mobilization, and between-group difference, 30 min following the intervention. This indicates that mobilizations applied to separate target locations within the cervical spine can differentially modulate the stress response.

No abstract